lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 702
Report #702 Skillset: Pyromancy Skill: New Org: Pyromancers Status: Completed Oct 2011 Furies' Decision: We will look at implementing solution 3. Problem: Unless a Pyromancer takes up Psionics, they have no way to determine the extent of burn levels on a target without investing in a 450cr monocle artifact or choosing to opt out of Dreamweaving or Runes. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Create a new ability in Pyromancy that requires, but not consumes, balance and equilibrium to determine a target's burn level. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Add in the ability to detect burn levels to an existing skill in Discernment or Pyromancy. 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Alter Flashfire's third-person message to reflect varying burn levels, much as Aquamancy IceFloe shows different freeze levels. Player Comments: ---on 10/2 @ 20:21 writes: Few things: Dosn't salamanders declare burn levels? Though it's not exactly desirable, why would you not take psionics? If this is going to be a trend, should I envoy something similar for thornlashes? ---on 10/2 @ 23:01 writes: I've no problem if folk want an ability to denote thornlashes or cloudcoils, for that matter. And I look at making our kill condition streamlined for all of our tertiaries, rather than just the popular so as not to discourage the rare few who decide to become Dreamweaver or Runist Pyromancers - meaning they need a means of ascertaining burn levels without Psionics. As for Salamanders, I've not seen any notation that their message corresponds to burn levels. ---on 10/4 @ 02:42 writes: Salamanders showing burn levels was solution 2 for report 498. Solution 1, a change to the afflictions given by salamanders, was chosen instead. ---on 10/10 @ 22:20 writes: Solution 3. ---on 10/11 @ 08:43 writes: Sol 3. Or salamanders or whatever. Doing similar stuff for druids/aeros would be neat, (and it'd be nice to not need a separate report for so similar issues) but at least this. I support this report. ---on 10/14 @ 00:17 writes: After some discussions, unless all similar skills gain the passive message, an active ability in the Primary would be preferred. In that case, Solution 1/2. ---on 10/15 @ 20:51 writes: I think this is needed, but I don't like the solutions other than maybe solution 3 unless the same were done for aeromancers, and druids. If this were to be done I believe the best solution would be to add third person messages to all of them, or add a skill in aeromancy/pyromancy etc to discern for that affliction specifically. ---on 10/15 @ 21:09 writes: I like solution 3 the most, including adding a message to similar abilities. Not against solution 1/2 either. ---on 10/15 @ 23:15 writes: Prefer solution 3, would not object to solutions 1/2. Also in favour of a similar report for druids/aeromancers. ---on 10/17 @ 07:15 writes: Solution 3, for druids and aeromancers as well. I don't think two more envoy slots should be spent for a change like this. ---on 10/17 @ 23:59 writes: Any solution is fine ---on 10/21 @ 22:38 writes: I don't see why pyromancy needs a skill to be able to see how many people have. Burns isn't even the main form of kill a pyromancer has at their disposal. If there is an issue with dreamweaving and runes being less effective for mages than psionic mages, then isn't the problem with dreamweaving/runes, rather than pyromancy specifically? Also, some classes -do- need a monocle. Just take bards for example. Our main (and in many cases) only form of killing is through mass burst damage by setting up a full DiscordantChord. Just check report 506 for one of the many examples of how hard it is for bards to pull off this burst damage skill (not even an insta and in many cases not even enough damage to ensure a kill even with further damaging). I feel if you want to add something like this, you'll have to look across all guilds, not just at mages/druids and definitely not solely on pyromancers ---on 10/22 @ 22:30 writes: Feel free to envoy another suggestion if 506 was rejected if the Administration weren't happy with your proposed solutions. Disagreeing with a problem eight other envoys recognize because your own report wasn't accepted doesn't negate the existence of this problem I'm seeking a solution to.